PURPOSE: The benefit of salvage chemotherapy is modest in metastatic urothelial cancer. We conducted a randomized, noncomparative phase II study to measure the efficacy of cetuximab with or without paclitaxel in patients with previously treated urothelial cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic urothelial cancer who received one line of chemotherapy in the perioperative or metastatic setting were randomly assigned to 4-week cycles of cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) with or without paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) per week. We used early progression as an indicator of futility. Either arm would close if seven of the initial 15 patients in that arm progressed at the first disease evaluation at 8 weeks. RESULTS: We enrolled 39 evaluable patients. The single-agent cetuximab arm closed after nine of the first 11 patients progressed by 8 weeks. The combination arm completed the full accrual of 28 patients, of whom 22 patients (78.5%) had visceral disease. Twelve of 28 patients had progression-free survival greater than 16 weeks. The overall response rate was 25% (95% CI, 11% to 45%; three complete responses and four partial responses). The median progression-free survival was 16.4 weeks (95% CI, 12 to 25.1 weeks), and the median overall survival was 42 weeks (95% CI, 30.4 to 78 weeks). Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events that occurred in at least two patients were rash (six cases), fatigue (five cases), and low magnesium (three cases). CONCLUSION: Although it had limited activity as a single agent, cetuximab appears to augment the antitumor activity of paclitaxel in previously treated urothelial cancers. The cetuximab and paclitaxel combination merits additional study to establish its role in the treatment of urothelial cancers.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The benefit of salvage chemotherapy is modest in metastatic urothelial cancer. We conducted a randomized, noncomparative phase II study to measure the efficacy of cetuximab with or without paclitaxel in patients with previously treated urothelial cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic urothelial cancer who received one line of chemotherapy in the perioperative or metastatic setting were randomly assigned to 4-week cycles of cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) with or without paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) per week. We used early progression as an indicator of futility. Either arm would close if seven of the initial 15 patients in that arm progressed at the first disease evaluation at 8 weeks. RESULTS: We enrolled 39 evaluable patients. The single-agent cetuximab arm closed after nine of the first 11 patients progressed by 8 weeks. The combination arm completed the full accrual of 28 patients, of whom 22 patients (78.5%) had visceral disease. Twelve of 28 patients had progression-free survival greater than 16 weeks. The overall response rate was 25% (95% CI, 11% to 45%; three complete responses and four partial responses). The median progression-free survival was 16.4 weeks (95% CI, 12 to 25.1 weeks), and the median overall survival was 42 weeks (95% CI, 30.4 to 78 weeks). Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events that occurred in at least two patients were rash (six cases), fatigue (five cases), and low magnesium (three cases). CONCLUSION: Although it had limited activity as a single agent, cetuximab appears to augment the antitumor activity of paclitaxel in previously treated urothelial cancers. The cetuximab and paclitaxel combination merits additional study to establish its role in the treatment of urothelial cancers.
Authors: K Inoue; J W Slaton; P Perrotte; D W Davis; C J Bruns; D J Hicklin; D J McConkey; P Sweeney; R Radinsky; C P Dinney Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: David J Vaughn; Catherine M Broome; Maha Hussain; John C Gutheil; Avi B Markowitz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David J Gallagher; Matthew I Milowsky; Scott R Gerst; Nicole Ishill; Jamie Riches; Ashley Regazzi; Mary G Boyle; Alisa Trout; Anne-Marie Flaherty; Dean F Bajorin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-02-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alberto F Sobrero; Joan Maurel; Louis Fehrenbacher; Werner Scheithauer; Yousif A Abubakr; Manfred P Lutz; M Eugenia Vega-Villegas; Cathy Eng; Ernst U Steinhauer; Jana Prausova; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Christophe Borg; Gary Middleton; Hendrik Kröning; Gabriele Luppi; Oliver Kisker; Angela Zubel; Christiane Langer; Justin Kopit; Howard A Burris Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-04-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert Pirker; Jose R Pereira; Aleksandra Szczesna; Joachim von Pawel; Maciej Krzakowski; Rodryg Ramlau; Ihor Vynnychenko; Keunchil Park; Chih-Teng Yu; Valentyn Ganul; Jae-Kyung Roh; Emilio Bajetta; Kenneth O'Byrne; Filippo de Marinis; Wilfried Eberhardt; Thomas Goddemeier; Michael Emig; Ulrich Gatzemeier Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-05-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Yu-Ning Wong; Elizabeth R Plimack; Samuel Litwin; David Vaughn; James Lee; Wei Song; Gary R Hudes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Julia Fazel; Silvia Rötzer; Christof Seidl; Benedikt Feuerecker; Michael Autenrieth; Gregor Weirich; Frank Bruchertseifer; Alfred Morgenstern; Reingard Senekowitsch-Schmidtke Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 4.742
Authors: Metin Kurtoglu; Nicole N Davarpanah; Rui Qin; Thomas Powles; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Andrea B Apolo Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Bishoy M Faltas; Beerinder S Karir; Scott T Tagawa; Jonathan E Rosenberg Journal: Expert Opin Ther Targets Date: 2015-01-30 Impact factor: 6.902
Authors: Maha Hussain; Stephanie Daignault; Neeraj Agarwal; Petros D Grivas; Arlene O Siefker-Radtke; Igor Puzanov; Gary R MacVicar; Ellis Glenn Levine; Sandy Srinivas; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Mario A Eisenberger; David I Quinn; Ulka N Vaishampayan; Evan Y Yu; Scott Dawsey; Kathleen C Day; Mark L Day; Mahmoud Al-Hawary; David C Smith Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-05-06 Impact factor: 6.860